Arizona silver belt. [volume] (Globe City, Pinal County, Ariz.) 1878-19??, 1887-04-02
rnE rnnRNraN 80.

ter and sentenced to ten years servi-
tude in the Territorial prison. The
proceeding upon information, was
clearly illegal, and the fact was
brought to Judge pnney's knowledge
by District Attorney &cGabe, before
the case was called for trial, who Of
tered to submit authorities supporting
his view of the case, but "the learned
Judge" was impeuous and ordered
the District Attorney to proceed as
directed. There beng no alternative
for the District Attorney but to enter
upon the farce Of a trial, the following
named persons were accepted and
sworn as jurors, A. Pringle, Foreman;
Joseph Hazard, A, Watkins, William
Ellison, Charles Bouuot, 7. j. Cline,
David Deyore, John Pembcrton, Hen
ry Frauck, William Mallory, Robert
Holt and Con Ryan They rendered
a verdict Of manslaughter and the
Judge sentenced the defendant as
above stated. Aud now upon com
plant, BY Thornton, Of illegal deten-
ton, he is released ffoh the operation
Of the trial, BY Judge Porter, and re-
manded to the custody Of Thomas
Gates, subject to the order Of the
Sheriff Of Gila county. The result
will be an investigation by the grand
sjury and, il an indictment is found,
Ftrial; we cannot say a second trial for
the reason that the first was nulhty,
possessing none Of the requisites Of
law.
Why "the first trial" is void, in or
der to render it plain to Che general
reader, requires explanation, and,
therefore, we win state that murder Is
an infamous crime, made 50 BY the
Fact that it carries with it, against the
offender, q degradation of bis civil |
rights. Article v Of the Consultation
Of the United States, especially pro-
vides, that mo person shall be held to |
answer for capital or otherwise IN
famous crime, unless on present
ment or indictment Of a grand jury |
except in cases arising in the land or
naval forces, or il the militia, when
in actual service in time Of war" On
this ground, A. q Baker, Tborntou's
attorney entered a demurrer as fol-
lows:
{ The defendant demurs To THE iu- (
formation filed herein, and for cause
OF demurrer assigns the following
grounds First Such information
does not substantially conform Il Sec 4
tiOn 2l4, Chap =, Of the Compiled \
Laws OF Arizona, in this to-wii ga)I
1t Is not az accusation oi auy grand
jury; (b) il is not an indictments % IT
was nor found OK presented or lndorsed /
BY any grand jury whatever; (dl itI
was not concurred IN by any number
OF grand jurors whatever Second /
Srcb information contains matter con
siituting a legal bar 10 any praSecu
ton under II, ia th@ to-wit; II pug
ports to be aH information by the Dis |
frirt Attorney and shows upon its
face that il Is hsitber ah indictment 4
accusation. pgesentment OF other art
OF any Hrand jury whatever aud
charges murder without any present
ment or indictment of any grand n
Jury" II
The motion to dismiss was, how
ever, oyerruled BY Judge Pinney.
The principle Of law, which we con.
tend should have applied in this ease
was held to 10 good law in a case sp-i
pealsd to the Federal court from the
Washington Territorial eonrt, where
IN it was decided that conviction on
was Invalid.
Article Y Of the Constitution de-
,lares, also, that 40 person shall 30
subject fol- the same ofense 10 10
.wioe put 10 jeopardy of life 81 limb,
nor be deprived of life, llbafty, 81
without due process of law
Murder il, by law, declared an infam.
Gus crime because of Tie degradation ,
If the offender from his evil rights; /
and without an indictment or pre-
Of grand jury the element
If constitutional law IS wanting III
.ho Thorptou ease and, therefore, the (
egal ingredients necessary to protect
Thornton from second trial are
wanting
This Judicial btander cannot BE-
:harged upon Judge Pinney as viii
.uily made no Doubt he believed be 4
vas right and, therefore TIE responsi-
Jility rests with the appointing ltower !
who ass gnea legal tyro 70 d Judicial /
position III Arizona
The costs already incurred and paid,
n the "Jrial" and the removal Of
Thornton 70 the Territorial prison,
mounts to $3.50 81, and the cost Of
bis return to Globe, for trial, viii BE-
sbout $50, which added to costs,
stated its already incurred, places the
aggregate sum at $500 65. We win
lot predict the cost of the second trial
ind It's results, but win await their
lefnite computation n,
Under sheriff, John Benbrool, viii
start for Yuma prison, on fine, IN or
Ter that Thornton may be present, at
,he coming term az court fan trial